Replies

According to the article, the elevator would travel at speeds as slow as 10 MPH. The international space station is 220 miles above the earth? Who's going to sit on an elevator for 22 hours?

Look, if we can perceive of technology capable of 200-300 mile high elevator, then why not look to develop technology similar to that from Star Trek--the transporter, or the shuttles--which could get a person from the ground to space in mere minutes? After all, if we're going to fantasize about future modes of transportation, then let's really use our imagination.

It seems to me that even if this guy is serious, he's also looking in the wrong direction for scientific advancement.

Actually, of all the proposed non-rocket methods of getting to LEO, this one is just behind the laser launcher as far as practicability. The proper material for a space cable may remain out of reach, but a laser powerful enough to launch pods into orbit will be available soon. A space elevator would provide the cheapest way for mass transportation. All you would need is electricity, and a good chunk of it would be provided by the elevators going back down to earth. I agree that 10 MPH is unrealistically slow, but 100-200 mph is not.

Who's going to sit on an elevator for 22 hours?

Me! I sat on a plane for 20+ hours to get to Korea; I'm willing to sit on an elevator for 20+ hours to get into space.

Look, if we can perceive of technology capable of 200-300 mile high elevator, then why not look to develop technology similar to that from Star Trek--the transporter, or the shuttles--which could get a person from the ground to space in mere minutes?

Because transporters are still remote freaks of way-out-there quantum mechanics, and shuttles are what we're trying to move away from (remember Challenger & Columbia?).

The space elevator is NOT way-out-there sci-fi fantasy, it is a realistic idea. It's just basic well-understood physics (ok, orbital mechanics is kinda strange, but still just an extention of mechanical physics). The only thing really inhibiting construction is lack of strong enough materials, which recently-developed carbon nanotubes seem to be; it can be done, we just need to work out large-scale production.

There's a difference between imaginative stories and "we're working on that."

The Space elevator would have to extend into a Geosynchronous orbit, 22,0000 miles above the earth. The space station is moving too fast at 200+ mile orbit to dock on a stationary (relative to earth) platform.

So, its more like a 2200 hour ride at 10 mph. (taint' gonna happen)

Who's going to sit on an elevator for 22 hours?

Cargo doesn't care how long it takes. Besides, even if we're talking about people, I think astronauts are used to sitting around for extended periods of time.

Look, if we can perceive of technology capable of 200-300 mile high elevator, then why not look to develop technology similar to that from Star Trek--the transporter, or the shuttles--which could get a person from the ground to space in mere minutes? After all, if we're going to fantasize about future modes of transportation, then let's really use our imagination.

Apples and oranges. The space elevator is an engineering challenge. The science is already pretty well established. Your other ideas are scientific challenges, which make them far greater hurdles. You have to fully understand the science first, before you can start engineering something.